Literature Review in Citizenship,Technology and Learning

REPORT 3:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Neil Selwyn, School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University

AIMS

This review is intended to provide:

1 a sound theoretical and empiricallyinformed basis for informing policy onteaching and learning citizenship with ICT

2 a basis for communication between theeducational research community andthe commercial sector on the subject of teaching and learning citizenship with ICT

3 a sound theoretical and empiricallyinformed basis for prototypedevelopment of digital learningresources to support citizenshipteaching and learning.

1

CONTENTS:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

SECTION 1INTRODUCTION TO REVIEW 7

SECTION 2CITIZENSHIP, TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNING - DEFINITIONS AND DEBATES 8

SECTION 3INFORMATION ANDCOMMUNICATIONSTECHNOLOGIES AS A TOPIC IN THE CITIZENSHIP CURRICULUM 11

SECTION 4THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION 14

SECTION 5THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING CITIZENSHIPEDUCATION THROUGH THE WHOLE SCHOOL 22

SECTION 6TECHNOLOGY AND CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION:TOWARDS AN AGENDA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH, POLICY AND PRACTICE 24

SECTION 7SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, CURRICULUMDEVELOPMENT, DESIGN OF LEARNING RESOURCES AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 26

BIBLIOGRAPHY 30

APPENDIX 36

Literature Review in Citizenship,Technology and Learning

REPORT 3:

FUTURELAB SERIES

Neil Selwyn, School of Social SciencesCardiff University

This report has been designed to enable both rapid identification of the key findings and in-depth exploration of the literature.

The key findings and implications of the report are presented within the Executive Summary and Implications Sections. The main body of the review enablesreaders to explore in more detail the background to these headline issues.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There is little high calibre empiricalresearch focusing on technology andcitizenship. There is, however, a sizeabletheoretical literature which is beginning toconsider general issues of citizenship andtechnology, complementing the practicalwork that is currently taking place inschools. Using this knowledge base wecan begin to map out the roles thattechnology can play in teaching andlearning within citizenship education.

WHAT IS CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION?

Citizenship is now a statutory element ofthe UK National Curriculum at secondaryschool level (Key Stages 3 and 4) and anon-statutory element of teaching andlearning in primary education (Key Stages1 and 2). In broad terms, the NationalCurriculum defines citizenship educationaround the three strands of:

• knowledge and understanding aboutbecoming informed citizens

• developing skills of enquiry andcommunication

• developing skills of participation and responsible action.

Despite the mandatory nature of thesubject, the National Curriculum givesschools and teachers great flexibility todevelop their own innovative approaches to citizenship and develop their owncurriculum content.

It is clear that schools and teachers canuse information and communicationstechnology (ICT) to achieve these aims ofunderstanding, enquiry and participation.

Yet it is also clear that ICT can be (and is currently being) used to support onlylimited forms of citizenship education.From this perspective, the way that ICT isused to facilitate citizenship education iscrucial - implying a design responsibilityon the part of educational technologistsand software developers to allow effectiveand expansive teaching and learning.

From a theoretical perspective there aredifferent ways of teaching and learningcitizenship. Some of the most importantdistinctions are:

Passive citizenship: being the product of an education which seeks to develop knowledge,understandings and behaviours ofcitizenship

Vs.

Active citizenship:which augments this passive modelwith an ability to critique, debate andpropose alternative models of thestructures and processes ofdemocracy.

2

the NationalCurriculum gives

schools andteachers great

flexibility todevelop their

own innovativeapproaches

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Education ABOUT citizenship: providing students with sufficientknowledge and understanding ofnational history and the structures and processes of government andpolitical life

Vs.

Education THROUGH citizenship: students learning by doing throughactive, participative experiences in the school or local community and beyond. This learning reinforcesthe knowledge component

Vs.

Education FOR citizenship: encompasses the ‘about’ and ‘through’ strands and involvesequipping students with a set of tools (knowledge and understanding,skills and aptitudes, values anddispositions) which enable them toparticipate actively and sensibly in the roles and responsibilities theyencounter in their adult lives.

Most commentators see effectivecitizenship education as where citizenship‘for’ and ‘through’ education areencouraged - involving active participation,learning through doing, the development of values, attitudes and dispositions andusing a variety of resources. Althoughmore difficult to provide, it is theseelements of the citizenship educationcurriculum that educationalists andtechnologists need to focus their futureefforts on when developing ICT applications.

DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY AS A SUBJECT OF CITIZENSHIPEDUCATION

A key technological issue yet to beaddressed adequately by the educationliterature is how ICT should be approachedas a topic of citizenship education. TheNational Curriculum highlights the area of new technology and media as a relevantelement of citizenship curricula, but leavesconsiderable flexibility of definition anddevelopment of content on the part ofschools and teachers. Much thought andeffort needs to go into developinginnovative yet rational ICT elements inschools’ citizenship curricula.

There is no doubt that the networking ofICTs and the globalisation of society isredefining the notion of citizenship. On thisbasis some technologists and governmentagencies are currently lobbying for an ‘e-citizenship’ element to be integratedinto citizenship education - with the aim ofpreparing learners for life in the expected‘online society’.

Yet the present e-citizenship debate has direct precedent in the ‘publicunderstanding of science’, ‘computerliteracy’ and ‘science-technology-society’debates which took place throughout the1980s and 1990s. These movements havebeen only partially successful in UKeducation - and serve to warn us withregard to future activity.

In particular we should be wary of over-emphasising the potential use oftechnology in society as opposed to itsactual use. There is clearly a need for thedevelopment of a sensible curriculumwhich moves beyond a functional model ofICT knowledge and additionally aims to

3

much thoughtand effort needsto go intodevelopinginnovative yetrational ICTelements inschools’citizenshipcurricula

REPORT 3LITERATURE REVIEW IN CITIZENSHIP, TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNINGNEIL SELWYN, SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, CARDIFF UNIVERSITY

demystify technology and explore its widersocietal consequences. This can be seenas an ‘ideological’ model of technology andsociety. The emphasis of an ideologicalapproach is on considering how and whyICT has been constructed and shaped,rather than attempting specific functionaldefinitions of ICT and society. From thisperspective we can offer the followingareas of citizenship and technology whichcould be developed in a maximal model ofcitizenship education:

• awareness of the social implications of ICT for individuals

• awareness of the implications of ICT at a societal level

• awareness of the ‘social shaping’ oftechnology by social, cultural, politicaland economic influences

• addressing questions of equity in access to, and use of, ICT

• awareness of issues of power andcontrol associated with newtechnologies in society

• awareness of the historical precedents as well as the futurepotentials of new technologies.

USING ICT TO FACILITATECITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

In terms of facilitating the teaching andlearning of citizenship there are fourdifferent applications of technology as atool which can be identified:

I USING ICT AS A SOURCE OFCITIZENSHIP INFORMATION

The provision of information via the worldwide web and CD-Rom databases is themost popular citizenship application of ICTin current practice and fits in readily withthe National Curriculum strand‘knowledge and understanding aboutbecoming informed citizens’. This is a goodexample of ICT being used to promoteeducation about citizenship. In theory thisuse of ICT allows learners access to a widerange of information, opinions andperspectives from around the world thatwould otherwise be inaccessible. Despitebeing a growing area of activity there islittle or no research examining theeffectiveness of ICT in deliveringcitizenship learning in this way, with thescant educational literature that isavailable consisting only of reflexivereports of the development of onlinecitizenship resources.

Although research focusing on what andhow students learn from such resources is scarce, parallels can be drawn with theestablished body of research focusing onyoung people’s use of news media andtheir subsequent levels of politicalparticipation and knowledge. Althoughsome early psychological researchconcluded that higher levels of newsmedia use were correlated positively withlevels of political participation, the generalacademic consensus now questions thelasting effects of exposure to news media.This lack of direct evidence could suggestthat increased access to citizenshipinformation and resources via mediashould not be seen as necessarily leadingto increased levels of citizenship. From apedagogic perspective the passivepresentation of citizenship information via

4

from a pedagogic

perspective thepassive

presentation ofcitizenship

information viaICT is not ‘best

practice’

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ICT is not best practice - and should not be seen as an area of cutting edgedevelopment over the next decade.

II USING ICT AS A MEANS OFENGENDERING CITIZENSHIPDISCUSSION

The role of ICT in encouraging discussionof citizenship matters should be seen as amore appropriate area of development -fitting with the National Curriculumstrand: ‘developing skills of enquiry andcommunication’. There has been somedevelopment of ICT-based simulations ofsocial situations with the aim ofstimulating discussion amongst learnersbut, again, little specific research has beencarried out into the effectiveness of suchsoftware. There are suggestions from onestudy that software designed explicitly toinvolve group discussion and decision-making when coupled with non-ICT basedlessons in communication skills can beeffective. However, research into the use of general simulation environments ineducation is more ambivalent - reportingthat learners sometimes have difficulty insetting their own goals and framing theirlearning activities in a relativelyunstructured environment. We canconclude, therefore, that any citizenshipsimulations should be structured andclosely aligned with the offline citizenshipcurricula of the classroom, and thenecessary role of the teacher should be recognised.

Online and networked communicationpackages form another source of ICT-based citizenship learning to promotediscussion. Yet the little empirical workcarried out on educational discussiongroups - alongside earlier work on non-

educational groups - has reached mixedconclusions as to the social andeducational benefits of such interactions.Online discussion groups can therefore beseen as offering complementary arenas toreal-life communities and networkingamongst learners.

III USING ICT TO HELP LEARNERSPRODUCE CITIZENSHIP MATERIALS

A third area highlighted in the educationliterature - but with little direct empiricalbackground - is the area of using ICT toenable students to be producers ofcitizenship cultural products. This area ispotentially the most exciting and fruitfularea of ICT development for citizenshipeducation - fitting closely with the NationalCurriculum strand: ‘developing skills ofenquiry and communication’. Production ofcultural products such as websites, videosand animations focusing on citizenshipissues is sometimes time-consuming andtechnically demanding, but the processesof active design and production could beseen as offering a more valuablecitizenship learning experience than the passive consumption of ready-madeproducts. This should be seen as a key area for ICT development over the next 5 years.

IV USING ICT FOR WHOLE SCHOOLCITIZENSHIP ACTIVITIES ANDPRACTICES

The final, and perhaps most innovative,application of technology to citizenshipeducation takes the form of ICT-basedwhole school citizenship activities andpractices - fitting with the National

5

citizenshipsimulationsshould bestructured andclosely alignedwith the offlinecitizenshipcurricula of theclassroom

Curriculum strand: ‘developing skills ofparticipation and responsible action’. Thisis based on the widely held belief that theschool and classroom are key sites oflearning about power, authority, controland notions of fairness and justice. Thereare a range of formal ‘student voice’structures and policies that can beadopted at a whole school level. Schoolscan be encouraged to use the informalschool curriculum as a vehicle to promotecitizenship through the use of schoolcouncils and other class decision-makingactivities. There are obvious ICTapplications to this element of citizenshipeducation (ie inter-school virtualcommunities and e-democracy) but verylittle research and software developmentto support its use.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOREDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Whilst there is much theoretical writingthere has been little, if any, high calibreresearch carried out in the area ofcitizenship and technology. The researchstudies that do exist are, on the whole,small scale, often in case study form,providing exploratory and reflexiveaccounts. Whilst providing a usefulbackground to the issues raised, issues ofsampling, measurement of outcomes andweak generalisability hamper the existingsmall body of literature to the extent thatbroad empirically informed conclusionscan not (and should not) be drawn. There is evidently a pressing need for well-thought out and rigorous research to be carried out - addressing a range of questions:

• how can ICT best be used to facilitateactive rather than passive citizenshiplearning?

• which types of online/networkedinteractions facilitate the most effectivediscussions between communities ofcitizenship learners?

• how can ICT-based democracy best beapplied in classroom and whole schoolsettings?

• do ICT-based democracy and ‘studentvoice’ applications lead to implicitand/or explicit citizenship learning?

• in what ways does students’ productionof digital citizenship resources engendercitizenship learning?

It must be recognised that some questionsthat educationalists and policymakerswould like to ask about citizenship andtechnology cannot be rigorouslyresearched and satisfactorily answered.For example, it is difficult to try to measuremany of the outcomes of citizenshipeducation and, it follows, the effectivenessof ICT in creating informed citizens. Thedearth of robust research in the area ofcitizenship education is partly a result ofthe difficulty of adequately measuringprogress in an area with broadly definedoutcomes. The key and cutting edgequestions surrounding citizenship and new technologies are more likely to betheoretical and exploratory rather thanempirical and definitive.

Whilst this review has been able to identifyareas of future activity for educators and technologists (see Summary ofImplications) there is a definite need forcareful practice in this area. It should beconcluded that the area of citizenshipeducation is one which is best approachedwith caution by educational technologists

6

some questions that

educationalistsand policymakerswould like to askabout citizenship

and technologycannot berigorously

researched andsatisfactorily

answered

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

wishing to make a lasting, valuable impacton educational practice. Citizenshipeducation is an area of the curriculumwhich is ripe for the misapplication of ICT - as a quick fix to a new and ill-definedarea of education which some teachersand schools are ambivalent or hostiletowards. Commercially there are alreadysuggestions of companies merelyrepackaging existing software with a ‘new’citizenship tag. Although the existingsoftware and resource base is useful itconcentrates too much on passivecitizenship education. This review ofliterature highlights some of the areas andapproaches which will be more fruitful - in promoting active, participative, learningthrough and for citizenship.

1 INTRODUCTION TO REVIEW

The teaching and learning of citizenship isan area of current educational interestwith most developed countries around theworld introducing mandatory citizenshipelements to school curricula over the pastdecade (eg Government of Australia 1994,Center for Civic Education 1994). In UKschools citizenship has now beenintroduced as a statutory element of theNational Curriculum at secondary level(Key Stages 3 and 4) and as a non-statutory element of teaching and learningin primary education (Key Stages 1 and 2).This recent compulsion to delivercitizenship education has led inevitably torenewed attention being focused on thisarea of education which has beentraditionally marginalised in terms ofpolicy, practice and research. As Kerr(2000, p16) observes:

"One of the key points to emerge from theliterature in the area is that we have only alimited knowledge and understanding ofwhat actually happens in citizenshipeducation in schools, classrooms andelsewhere. Little systematic research hasbeen conducted since the 1970s".

Building on Kerr’s general observation, theoverriding conclusion of the present reviewis that there is little, or no, high calibreempirical research focusing on technologyand citizenship in either education orassociated social science fields. There is,however, a burgeoning theoreticalliterature which is beginning to debategeneral issues of citizenship andtechnology, alongside current practicalactivity. Set against the paucity of empiricalevidence the present paper offers acomprehensive review of the academicliterature in the field of citizenship -concentrating specifically on the place of technology as a topic of citizenshipeducation and the roles that technologycan play in teaching and learning withincitizenship education.

2 CITIZENSHIP, TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNING - DEFINITIONS ANDDEBATES

In spite (or because of) the large amount ofdiscussion in the area, citizenship remainsan "essentially contested concept" ineducation (Beck 1996). Over the last 30 years there has been considerabledebate as to the role that formal educationshould have in engendering citizenship.McLaughlin (1992) makes the distinctionbetween ‘thick’ citizenship education(where citizenship is a public concernwhich should be promoted formally inschools’ formal curriculum) and ‘thin’

7

we have only a limitedknowledge andunderstanding ofwhat actuallyhappens incitizenshipeducation inschools,classrooms andelsewhere

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION TO REVIEW

citizenship education (where citizenship isa largely private concern which should onlybe promoted informally in schools’ throughthe hidden curriculum).

At a general level, most authors wouldconcur with TH Marshall’s (1950)identification of citizenship asencompassing a civil sense of basic rightsand protections, political rights (voting andpublic assembly) and right to socialcitizenship (employment, housing,healthcare and other social-welfarebenefits). In these broad terms citizenshiphas long been an informal part of teachingand learning in schools - either implicitlyin subjects such as English, history andgeography or under a number of subjecttitles from civics, life skills, moraleducation, personal and social educationand world studies. The differencesbetween these subject titles are more thansemantic, they highlight importantdifferences in the way that citizenship canbe taught and learnt. ‘Civics’ and ‘civiceducation’ are more often associated witheducation which stresses knowledge aboutcivic elements of society, whilst‘citizenship’ denotes a more participativeand active learning process (Morris &Cogan 2001). In this way, citizenshipeducation can be seen as running on apassive/active continuum - passivecitizenship being the product of aneducation which seeks to developknowledge, understandings andbehaviours of citizenship, and activecitizenship which augments this passivemodel with an ability to critique, debateand propose alternative models of thestructures and processes of democracy(Arthur and Davidson 2000).

From this theoretical basis it is worthwhiledistinguishing the different forms and

interpretations of citizenship educationthat exist before going onto examine therole(s) that ICT can play in the facilitationof citizenship education. For example,many authors describe a ‘maximal/minimal’ continuum (eg Kerr 1999, Morris and Cogan 2001):

Minimal• ‘thin’• exclusive• passive• civics education• formal• content-led• knowledge-based• didactic transmission• easier to achieve and measure

in practice• textbook reliant

Maximal• ‘thick’• inclusive• active• citizenship education• participative• process-led• values-based• interactive interpretation• more difficult to achieve and measure

in practice• uses a variety of resources

A complementary classification (Blyth1984) comes in the form of:

• education about citizenship: providingstudents with sufficient knowledge andunderstanding of national history andthe structures and processes ofgovernment and political life;

• education through citizenship: studentslearning by doing through active,

8

citizenship haslong been an

informal part ofteaching and

learning inschools

SECTION 2

CITIZENSHIP, TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNING - DEFINITIONS AND DEBATES

participative experiences in the schoolor local community and beyond. thislearning reinforces the knowledgecomponent;

• education for citizenship: encompassesthe other two strands and involvesequipping students with a set of tools(knowledge and understanding, skillsand aptitudes, values and dispositions)which enable them to participateactively and sensibly in the roles andresponsibilities they encounter in theiradult lives.

These different forms of citizenshipeducation are crucial to developing anunderstanding of the role(s) of ICT in theteaching and learning of citizenship.Contemporary educational thinkingstresses the need to enable the ‘maximal’and ‘education for citizenship’ approaches,reflecting the multi-faceted nature of thesubject and variety of potential methods of delivery:

"[Citizenship education] focuses oncitizenship and politics as participative andcontroversial matters, aiming to discussand explore the diversity of values andinterests that exist in a pluralistic society".(Crick 1999, p340)

"[Citizenship education] is as much aboutthe content as about the process ofteaching and learning. It lends itself to abroad mixture of teaching and learningapproaches, from the didactic to theinteractive, both inside and outside of theclassroom". (Morris & Cogan 2001, p120)

Before examining how ICT can be used to achieve these aims we first need toconsider the current context in which ICTis being applied in schools in England and

Wales - the construction of citizenship in the National Curriculum 2000.

UK CURRICULUM DEFINITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

Although citizenship has long been part of teaching and learning in UK schools,England and Wales was one of the lastEuropean education systems to recognisethis area formally as a mandatory elementof the curriculum. The recent NationalCurriculum 2000 guidelines for citizenshiphave been based on the framing CrickAdvisory Group’s (1998) reportidentification of three inter-relatedcomponents of education for citizenship:

• social and moral responsibility: learningself-confidence and socially and morallyresponsible behaviour both in andbeyond the classroom, towards those in authority and towards each other

• community involvement: learning andbecoming helpfully involved in the lifeand concerns of their neighbourhoodand communities, including learningthrough community involvement andservice to the community

• political literacy: learning aboutinstitutions, problems and practices of our democracy.

We can see how this ethos encompassesknowledge-based elements of educationabout citizenship but also stressesmaximal qualities of active participation,learning through doing and thedevelopment of values, attitudes anddispositions. Crucially, the Crick Reportand latterly the DfES have been keen tostress both the flexibility of skills, content

9

contemporaryeducationalthinking stressesthe need toenable the‘maximal’ and‘education forcitizenship’approaches,reflecting themulti-facetednature of thesubject andvariety ofpotentialmethods ofdelivery

and approaches that this type ofcitizenship and education may encompass:

"Pupils develop skills of enquiry,communication, participation andresponsibility through learning about and becoming informed and interestedcitizens. This can be achieved throughcreating links between pupils’ learning in the classroom, and activities that take place across the school, in thecommunity and the wider world". (DfES Citizenship Website 2002)

In formal terms within the NationalCurriculum, citizenship programmes of study are based around the threestrands of:

• knowledge and understanding aboutbecoming informed citizens

• developing skills of enquiry andcommunication

• developing skills of participation andresponsible action.

Despite the mandatory nature of thesubject, the National Curriculumguidelines place great emphasis on theflexibility of schools and teachers to buildupon existing practice and develop theirown innovative approaches to citizenship -thus giving individual schools substantialfreedom in how to achieve the learningobjectives and develop their own curriculain a way which reflects the spirit of thenationally agreed aims (Kerr 1999, Crick1999). As a result, the way that ICT is usedto facilitate citizenship education is crucial- implying a design responsibility on thepart of educational technologists andsoftware developers to allow maximalmodels of teaching and learning.

As a flexible and non-traditional subjectarea the National Curriculum recognisesthat citizenship education has obvious ICT applications - although guidance isslight. Specific reference to ICT as asubject of citizenship education is made in the first two strands of ‘knowledge and understanding’ and ‘enquiry andcommunication’, ie:

• pupils should be taught about […] themedia’s role in society, including theinternet, in providing information andaffecting opinion

• pupils should be taught to research a topical political, spiritual, moral, social or cultural issue, problem or event by analysing information from different sources, including ICT-based sources.

Similarly, the use of ICT as a means of delivering and facilitating citizenshipeducation is mentioned briefly. In the spirit of all elements of the curriculum, two ‘ICT opportunities’ are suggested in the National Curriculumdocuments, ie:

• pupils could use e-mail to exchange views

• pupils could explore the growingimportance of the internet, e-mail and e-commerce.

On the basis of these guidelines theapplication of technology to citizenshipeducation requires careful thought and a degree of caution.

10

the way that ICT is used to

facilitatecitizenship

education iscrucial

SECTION 2

CITIZENSHIP, TECHNOLOGY AND LEARNING - DEFINITIONS AND DEBATES

The remainder of this review now goes on to consider technology and citizenshipfrom three main perspectives:

i the implications of technology andtechnological change for the curriculumcontent of citizenship education

ii the role of ICT in facilitating the teachingand learning of citizenship in formalclassroom settings; and

iii the role of ICT in facilitating citizenshipeducation through the whole school.

Readers most interested in how citizenshipeducation can take account of technologychanges in wider society might best bedirected to Section 3. Readers mostinterested in developing educationalsoftware and in using ICT as part ofcitizenship teaching and learning wouldbest be directed to Sections 4 and 5.

3 INFORMATION ANDCOMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIESAS A TOPIC IN THE CITIZENSHIPCURRICULUM

A key issue in this field is not one of likelyICT application but the issue of how ICTshould be approached as a topic ofcitizenship education. Reviewing thepresent literature it is clear that this willnot, however, be an easy task.It is widely acknowledged, for example,that changes in technology and uses oftechnology have themselves promptedmany of the recent redefinitions ofcitizenship education. It is argued, forexample, that new media technologieshave rendered traditional notions ofcitizenship, social interaction andcommunity life and obligation meaningless

(eg Wexler 1990). As the followingquotations from educational and culturalstudies commentators highlight:

"The pace of technological and socialchange in the second half of the 20thcentury has left no section of societyunaffected. While technological advanceshave wrought irrevocable changes totraditional work practices, socialrelationships also have been inevitablystrained and tested… There is the vision ofa 21st century citizen living and working inpersonal isolation, with e-mail, e-economyand internet providing all their informationand service needs and the struggle toaccommodate this individualistic visionwithin the concept of an integrated society…Not surprisingly, therefore, thereconfiguration of citizenship has becomean international issue". (Turnbull & Muir2001, p429-430)

"When new media appear on the horizon -and sometimes when old media have beenwith us for a long time - crucial issues ofcitizenship are raised, on a spectrumarching from interpersonal conduct andhuman capital (the effects of new media on violence and education) to politicalidentification (their effects on sovereignallegiance and heritage appreciation… The decisive post-modern guarantee is access to the technologies ofcommunication as part of culturalcitizenship". (Miller 2001, p183)

These commentators effectively argue thatnew technologies so define society that ICTshould be at the heart of the content of allcitizenship education.

Whilst this is an extreme reaction, mostcommentators would concur that notionsof citizenship are being reconfigured to an

11

changes intechnology anduses oftechnology havethemselvesprompted manyof the recentredefinitions ofcitizenshipeducation

SECTION 3

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONSTECHNOLOGIES AS TOPIC IN THE

CITIZENSHIP CURRICULUM

extent by a globalisation of production and consumption led by informationtechnology. Indeed, the fact that citizenshiphas become an educational topic derigueur has been identified by manycommentators as a response to recentglobal changes. For example, Kerr (1999,p11) lists the following factors which have prompted a widescale educationalrethinking of citizenship over the past decade:

• the rapid movement of people withinand across national boundaries

• a growing recognition of the rights ofindigenous peoples and minorities

• the collapse of political structures andthe birth of new ones

• the changing role of women in society

• the impact of the global economy andchanging patterns of work

• the effect of a revolution in informationand communication technologies

• an increasing global population, and

• the creation of new forms of community.

Thus, as contemporary notions ofcitizenship are seen to be changing so toomust contemporary citizenship curricula.Some educational commentators such asEgglestone (1999), have been keen tobroadly acknowledge this, arguing forexample that to be ‘computer/communication skilled’ is a crucialelement of learning to be a citizen.However guidance over the precise formthat ICT content of a citizenshipcurriculum should take is still lacking.

In considering how ICT might beapproached as a topic of the citizenshipcurriculum, it is useful to pay attention to

relevant precedents within the long historyof curriculum development. This historyshows that much of the current e-citizenship debate and notions of a globalcitizenship are not entirely new. During the17th and 18th centuries, for example,writers like Bacon, Paine and Goldsmithall invoked notions of world citizenship.More recently, Marshall (1950)acknowledged how the changingtechnologies of production andemployment brought about a crucialtransformation of citizenship - althoughmost would now avoid seeing technologyand citizenship solely in terms of work and employment (Waks 1996).

The present e-citizenship debates alsohave direct precedent (and roots) in the‘public understanding of science’ and‘science-technology-society’ movements inscience education (Royal Society 1985,Power 1987). Here, as Jenkins (1999,p703) observes, "the rhetoric is thatcitizens need to be ‘scientifically literate’ inorder to be able to contribute to decision-making about issues that have a scientificdimension, whether these issues bepersonal or more broadly political".

Proponents of the public understanding ofscience have long argued for educationwhich "helps citizens make informeddecisions [about science and technology],particularly those which involve socialresponsibility" (Power 1987, p5) andengenders "citizen thinking- ie everydaythinking" about technological issues(Jenkins 1999, 704). These movementshave been, however, only partiallysuccessful - and serve to warn us withregard to future activity.

There is, of course, a danger in overstatingthe case for e-citizenship. As Fullinwider

12

as contemporarynotions of

citizenship areseen to be

changing so toomust

contemporarycitizenship

curricula

SECTION 3

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONSTECHNOLOGIES AS TOPIC IN THE CITIZENSHIP CURRICULUM

(1987, p33) argues, the scientific/technological literacy argument has attimes been appropriated by scientists andtechnologists wishing to raise the profileand funding of their specific subject areas:"I seriously doubt that scientific andtechnological illiteracy is more damagingto democracy than economic illiteracy orother illiteracies". Yet, whilst being wary of overstating the importance oftechnological issues, there is a clear need for the development of a sensiblecitizenship curriculum which aims todemystify technology and "set it in a socio-historical context with economic,political and cultural consequences"(Steele 1987, p739).

At this point it is appropriate to considerthe long history surrounding ‘computerliteracy’ (identifying what young peopleneed to ‘know about’ computers) as aneducational aim. With over 30 years ofdebate behind it, there has been a varietyof definitions of computer literacy offeredby various authors. It is often defined infunctional terms; ie in terms of a "set ofabstracted, value-free skills which can bedefined, measured and learned, and whichare functional to personal and economicdevelopment" (Mackay 1992, p125).

Although a functional model of computerliteracy is attractive for assessment anddelivery purposes, over the last ten yearsthere has been a growing criticism of thisapproach as being too narrow and one-dimensional. Instead, recentcommentators would argue that computerliteracy is not a neutral, objective ‘skill’ butis socially constructed (Mackay 1992). Akinto other notions of literacy, then, merelygaining skills does not make the learnercomputer literate. Instead computerliteracy entails an ability to use the

computer independently and creatively butalso, crucially, to understand ICT in itssocial context. Street (1987) refers to thisapproach as an ‘ideological’ model ofcomputer literacy. The emphasis of anideological approach is on considering how and why computer literacy has beenconstructed and shaped, rather thanattempting a specific functional definitionof what it is to be computer literate. AsBromley and Shutkin (1999, p1) contend:

"We think it crucial that our studentsdevelop the habit of examining whatconventionally goes unexamined andunchallenged, so as to foreground andproblematize the taken-for-grantedworkings of power; we wish them to askwhat interests shape technology and itsuse, what meanings are attached to it, who benefits from it, in what ways, and who does not".

It is also clear from research in otherfields that e-citizenship should not betaken as something young people naturallydevelop through interactions with digitaltechnologies. Following on from researchinto children’s use of screen media, weshould not assume that children aresophisticated or knowledgeable users andconsumers of ICT - despite their highlevels of use (eg Buckingham 1997a,Livingstone 1999, Facer et al 2001). Weneed to pay attention to this, for, as someauthors argue, any notion of ICT in thecitizenship curriculum should be builtaround learners’ existing technoculture -"effective citizenship education willsomehow incorporate or start from thatwhich is already important to the majorityof young people" (Supple 1999, p19).

A recent attempt to widen the debate hasbeen the work conducted by the British

13

literacy entailsan ability to usethe computerindependentlyand creativelybut also,crucially, tounderstand ICTin its socialcontext

Educational Communications andTechnology Agency (Becta). Becta hasattempted to map out the area byproposing notions of e-citizenship thatshould be integrated into the citizenshipcurriculum. Based around the dual themesof online participation in society andparticipation in an online society, theemergence of such advice mirrors thewider academic concerns with citizenshiprights within a global information economy(eg Mosco 1997). The Becta model of e-citizenship should be seen as helpful but limited to specialised aspects ofcitizenship, as it is based largely aroundparticipation in a range of nascentgovernment e-society initiatives (such as online voting and use of other onlinegovernment services).

From surveying these perspectives on the changing nature of citizenship andtechnology, we offer the following areaswhich could be developed to supplementexisting approaches in an attempt todevelop a maximal (inclusive, participative,values-led) model of citizenship education:

• awareness of the social implications of ICT for individuals

• awareness of the implications of ICT at a societal level

• awareness of the social shaping oftechnology by social, cultural, politicaland economic influences

• awareness of questions of equity inaccess to, and use of, ICT

• awareness of issues of power andcontrol associated with newtechnologies in society

• awareness of the historical precedentsas well as the future potentials of new technologies.

4 THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATINGTHE TEACHING AND LEARNING OFCITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

Aside from the place of technology as atopic in the citizenship curriculum we can now consider the role of technology in supporting and engendering theteaching and learning of citizenship. This discussion can be most usefullydivided into two sections:

i the formal/explicit teaching and learningof citizenship (this section) and

ii the informal/implicit engendering ofcitizenship at the level of the wholeschool (Section 5).

As was discussed previously, the sourcesof citizenship education and the methodsof delivery suggested in the NationalCurriculum orders are deliberately wide-ranging and left to the discretion of theindividual school and teacher. To datethere has been commercial andpractitioner activity around three different applications of technology:

i ICT as a source of citizenshipinformation

ii ICT as a means of taking part incitizenship discussion; and

iii ICT as a source of learners producingcitizenship materials.

These three approaches are now discussed in more detail alongside thevarying degrees of empirical evidencesupporting their use.

14

the onlinepresence ofcitizenship

information issubstantial and

looks set to formthe most

prevalent use of ICT for

citizenshippurposes

SECTION 4

THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

4.1 ICT AS A SOURCE OFCITIZENSHIP INFORMATION

CD-Rom databases and world wide webresources have been welcomed byeducationalists as a ready source ofcitizenship information for teachers andlearners. Indeed, the use of ICT as asource of citizenship information forms themajority of current activity by educatorsand technology companies and fits inreadily with the National Curriculumstrand of ‘knowledge and understandingabout becoming informed citizens’. Forexample, a wide range of citizenship-relevant websites and online resourceshave been collated under the auspices ofthe NGfL Virtual Teacher Centre and DfESCitizenship websites (see Appendix). From government departments and non-government organisations to commercialcompanies and local pressure groups, the online presence of citizenshipinformation is substantial and looks set to form the most prevalent use of ICT for citizenship purposes in contemporaryeducational practice.

The advantages of using ICT in thismanner are plenty and replicate theestablished arguments for educational use of the internet; ie allowing learnersaccess to a wide range of information,opinions and perspectives from around the world that would otherwise beinaccessible. This use of technology inengendering a world-wide perspective on civic, political and social areas isespecially pertinent to citizenship:

"[Citizenship] curricula focused too heavilyon the local or on particular nationalperspectives would appear to beinappropriate to teaching communicativedemocracy". (Enslin et al 2001, p129)

Yet despite being a burgeoning area ofactivity there is little or no researchexamining the effectiveness of ICT indelivering citizenship learning in this way.The scant educational literature that isavailable consists only of reflexive reportsof the development of online citizenshipresources. For example, the ongoingEuropean Union ‘Eurokid’ project involvingthe development and implementation ofanti-racist and democratic websites in fourcountries (Sweden, UK, Italy and Spain)has, to date, produced a limited literature.With the evaluation phase of the Eurokidproject some way off, the researchersoffer, as yet, no evidence of its effectiveness:

"We can neither foresee how popularSWEDKID will be with young people (or their teachers) nor any particularoutcomes". (Hällgren & Weiner 2002, p12)

Research focusing on what and howstudents learn from such resources isscarce. However, parallels can be drawnwith the established body of researchfocusing on young people’s use of newsmedia and subsequent levels of politicalparticipation and knowledge. There is arange of social psychological researchcarried out in the 1980s which generallyconcludes that higher levels of use of newsmedia are correlated positively withpolitical participation (eg Andreyenkov et al1989, Robinson et al 1989, Chaffee & Yang1990). Yet, such research can be easilycriticised for its poor definition of outcomeand pseudo-quantification of conceptssuch as ‘political knowledge’. As will bediscussed in Section 5, identifying - letalone measuring - concepts such aspolitical interest and democraticengagement is difficult. At best theseresearch findings should be approachedwith caution.

15

there is a dangerthat using ICT for the passivepresentation of(admittedlyincreased levelsof) citizenshipinformation willbe of limitedlasting value

Indeed, there is a body of other literaturewhich questions the lasting effects ofexposure to news media - contending thatviewers understand and learn relativelylittle from what they watch. Gunter (1987),for example, argues that viewers quicklyforget most of what they see - often failingto comprehend it in the first place.Similarly Graber (1988) observed thatpeople tend to be ‘cognitive misers’ -opting for the approach to new informationwhich they believe will involve the leastmental effort on their part. These pointshave been reinforced in some educationalresearch. Selwyn et al’s (2000) study ofautonomous ICT use in higher educationfound that, given the choice,undergraduate students opt for theapproach to locating and retrieving newinformation which they believe will involvethe least physical and mental effort ontheir part - often in the form of aconventional book-based library asopposed to the world wide web. Otherresearch has found that children can oftendevelop an over-simplified and trivialunderstanding of television news content(Cebrain de al Serna 1995) and that schoolstudents selectively watch and ‘switch off’from news broadcasts that they areexposed to in school settings (Buckingham1997b). Thus, it has been argued from thepassive presentation of citizenship contentin television, that:

"The idea that [media] helps us to broadenour horizons, to get to know other realities,and to learn more about the world and itscultures, is totally unfounded". (Selva & Sola 1995, p76)

From this perspective, as Buckingham(1999, p173) reasons, there is a need forpractitioners and researchers to avoidseeing increased access to citizenship

information and resources via media assomehow leading to increased levels ofcitizenship:

"Theoretically, [research studies] adopt anotion of political socialisation that ishighly functionalist: young people are seenas passive recipients of adults’ attempts tomould them into their allotted social roles.The approach here is thus essentiallypsychologistic. Young people’s disaffectionfrom politics, for example, is seen as akind of psychological dysfunction causedby a lack of information, rather than theshortcomings of the political system itself:all we have to do is provide the informationand disaffection will disappear".

Extending these studies to considering thepresentation of citizenship information viathe world wide web and CD-Roms, it couldbe concluded that there is a danger thatusing ICT for the passive presentation of(admittedly increased levels of) citizenshipinformation will be of limited lasting value.There is, as Buckingham (1999, p174)argues, a danger that increased levels ofcitizenship information will merely "createa kind of illusion of being informed… not aguarantee of active citizenship, but asubstitute for it". Indeed, online materialshave the potential to be as limited andbadly written as textbooks (Lawson 2001),with Morris & Cogan’s (2001, p112)research into citizenship education in sixcountries confirming the reductionistnature of such resource-based teaching:

"Generally, where textbooks wereavailable, their focus was on content andknowledge that stressed education aboutcitizenship. Thus, the goal was to providepupils with knowledge about nationalhistory and the structures and processesof government".

16

talk is obviouslyfundamental to

citizenship

SECTION 4

THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

Theoretically (and with tentative empiricalsupport) it can be concluded that thepassive presentation of citizenshipinformation via ICT does not compriseeverything that citizenship education canand should be about - and should not beseen as an area of cutting edgedevelopment over the next decade.

4.2 ICT AS A MEANS OF TAKING PARTIN CITIZENSHIP DISCUSSION

As Enslin et al (2001, p116) observe, "talkis obviously fundamental to citizenship" -as is listening and cooperating with others,tolerating other points of view and theability to construct a reasoned argument. Ifallowed the time and space to talk in school, students are capable ofexpressing sophisticated and complexnotions of their cultural identities andstatus as citizens (eg Rassool 1999). From this perspective, the role of ICT infacilitating and engendering discussion ofcitizenship matters can be identified as apotential area of development - fitting alsowith the National Curriculum strand:‘developing skills of enquiry andcommunication’.

Simulations and DiscussionThere has been some development of ICTsimulations of social situations incitizenship education with the aim ofstimulating discussion amongst learners.Typically such software involves thepresentation of various scenarios - often inthe form of an ongoing narrative - with thelearner(s) required to make decisions andjudgements at regular intervals which theninfluence the course of the narrative. Thisuse of ICT to engender empatheticdiscussion and decision making is now astandard model of current citizenship

software design (see Appendix for anindicative range of current titles). Yet,despite its burgeoning use in school, littlespecific research has been carried out todate into its effectiveness.

Research into the use of generalsimulation environments in education(usually in the area of science) has beenambivalent - reporting that learnerssometimes have difficulty in setting theirown goals and framing their learningactivities in a relatively unstructuredenvironment. The lack of systematicplanning and monitoring has beenidentified as a specific problem of suchsoftware (Lavoie & Good 1988, Simmons &Lunetta 1993, Veenman et al 1997, Schute& Glaser 1990) - with the regular use offraming questions and/or assessmentssuggested as a design solution (Tabak et al1996, de Jong et al 1998).

From a citizenship perspective, a studycarried out by Wegerif et al (1998) hassought to build upon previous researchexamining students’ talk when usingcomputers in small groups. Whereas muchof children’s talk when using computers inclassrooms together was found to be oflimited educational value (Mercer 1994,Wegerif & Scrimshaw 1997), Wegerif et al(1998) show how software can be used togenerate meaningful discussion whenembedded in a pedagogic context whichinvolves prior coaching in exploratory talkand a software design directly basedaround the wider citizenship curriculum.From a design perspective, levels ofdiscussion are increased by the use ofspecifically designed points in the softwarewhere discussion and talk is prompted.This study used a citizenship softwarepackage presenting a series of problemsembedded in a narrative structure and is

17

the role of ICT infacilitating andengenderingdiscussion ofcitizenshipmatters can beidentified as apotential area ofdevelopment

perhaps the most relevant study to presentsoftware development. Nevertheless, itwas small-scale and exploratory in nature- involving only five groups of threechildren using the software. (See theFuturelab Series review on Thinking Skillsfor a further discussion of this research).

Networked Discussion and CommunitiesAside from stand-alone simulationpackages, online and networkedcommunication packages (including e-mailand video-conferencing) form anothersource of ICT-based citizenship learning topromote discussion. Indeed, of theinternet’s three main functions of storage,transportation and communication (Jones1995), it is perhaps the capacity for onlinecontact and dialogue between learnersthat has provoked the most enthusiasmamongst educationalists. With regards tocitizenship, online discussion is an area ofcurrent development with a variety ofexamples of good practice. The BritishCouncil, for example, run a ‘Windows onthe World’ project where schools areplaced in e-mail contact with one another.The ‘i-learn’ organisation runs a host of‘learning circles’ connecting studentsacross Africa, South and North America,Australia and the Middle East, andfacilitating discussion and the exchange ofresources relating to the differenthistories, cultures, governments andgeographies of the learners involved.

Theoretically, this approach can beadvocated from a variety of perspectives.The enthusiasm surrounding the internet’srole as a platform for online educationalforums has been fuelled by wider societalexcitement surrounding computer

mediated communication (CMC) and itspotential for altering and creating newforms of social relations. Following thisline of thought, many authors have beenenticed by the democratic potential of theinternet and CMC. In theory, it is argued,the internet allows each user an equalvoice, or at least an equal right to speak(Foster 1996). This has also led many toextrapolate the capacity of the new ‘cyber-technologies’ in leading to new forms ofsocial interaction and relationships:

"Communications networks offer theprospect of greater opportunities forseeking advice, challenging orthodoxy,meeting new minds and constructing one’sown sense of self. Entirely new notions ofsocial action, based not upon proximity andshared physical experience but rather onremote networks of common perceptions,may begin to emerge and challengeexisting social structures". (Loader 1998, p10)

In the eyes of many technologists, onlinecommunication is a powerful medium forspecialist but disparate groups of like-minded individuals to form democratic‘virtual communities’, providing mutualsupport, advice and identity (eg Rheingold1993, Gates 1995). According to Rheingold,virtual communities can be defined as "thesocial aggregations that emerge from theNet when enough people carry on thosepublic discussions long enough, withsufficient human feeling, to form webs ofpersonal relationships in cyberspace"(Rheingold 1993, p5).

Theoretical advantages aside, the littleempirical work carried out on educationaldiscussion groups - alongside earlier workon non-educational internet groups (ieWellman & Gulia 1999, Smith & Kollock

18

it is perhaps thecapacity for on-line contact and

dialoguebetween learners

that hasprovoked the

most enthusiasm

SECTION 4

THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

1999, Roberts et al 1997, Schoch & White1997, Savicki et al 1996) - has reachedmixed conclusions as to the social benefitsof such interactions. That said, onlineforums have certainly proved successful infacilitating the exchange of information.Studies in education have found thatindividuals are often willing to cooperatewith each other and exchange information(eg Riel 1990, Riel & Levin 1990, Selwyn2000, Selinger 1998). This lends somecredence to claims for its capacity for online community building and theaggregation of knowledge in computer-mediated spaces as ‘computer-assistedgroupmind’ or ‘online brain trusts’(Rheingold 1993). Early work by Kahle andEschenauer (1995) describes the formationof networked learning communities ofadult learning via e-mail for political and cultural education but with noeducational evaluation.

There is also a small body of contemporaryresearch currently being carried out in theuse of ‘First Class’ intranet software inliberal adult education which seeks toexplore whether online message postingcan be said to foster reasoned dialogueand democratic practice. In someinstances no evidence is as yetforthcoming from these research projects(Hamilton et al 2002). Other projects havetaken the form of small scale case studiesand are of limited generalisability. Newand Greene (2001), for example, studiedthe online postings of two educationclasses totalling “approximately 45students”. From a conversational analysisof selected posts he concluded thatstudents’ interactions did show signs offemale participants assuming moredominant positions in the discussions thancould be expected in ‘real-life’ classroomconversations - although students did also

conform to and reproduce other limitedfacets of discussion such as avoiding deepengagement or conflict. Despiteconcluding that their study offers “strongevidence that students are engaged in aparticipatory democratic practice” (Newand Greene 2001, pg. 216), the study islimited both in its scope and execution.

Research into the use of online discussionaside from citizenship and liberaleducation is equally as ambivalent. Muchof the generated discussion in onlinediscussions forums where the participantsare dispersed and/or do not know eachother in an ‘offline’ capacity tends toemanate from a hardcore of participants.As Ogden (1994) points out, the fact thatmeaningful dialogue only takes placebetween relatively few members ofdiscussion groups or mailing lists, with the vast majority preferring to ‘lurk’ orpassively participate, means that suchsocial spaces are more accurately‘transcendent’ communities. If similargroups are to be developed for citizenshipeducation purposes by teachers, orfacilitated by developers, then attentionneeds to be paid to the need to mediate,manage and facilitate discussion in onlineenvironments in order to ensure optimalparticipation.

Adopting Mackay & Powell’s (1998) criteriaof mutual support as constituting a senseof community among internet discussiongroups, such forums oustide theeducational arena would seem to be basedaround providing such support for theirmembers. This has led some authors toargue that online support can be seen asdeveloping ‘critical communities’ and‘collaborative cultures’. Indeed, by theirvery nature online discussion groups arevoluntary, spontaneous, development-

19

orientated and unpredictable – they aregenerally anything but contrived. However,upon closer inspection any sense of‘community’ or ‘collaborative culture’ wasoften, at best, transitory. A willingness toextend help outside the carefullynegotiated boundaries of online groups israre with much apparently collaborativediscussion really taking place for personaland individual means. At best, therefore,online discussion groups can be seen asoffering complementary arenas to real-lifecommunities and networking amongstadults and students.

4.3 ICT AS A SOURCE OF LEARNERSPRODUCING CITIZENSHIP ACTIVITIES- FULLY ACTIVE APPLICATIONS OF ICT

A third area highlighted in the educationliterature - but with little empirical work -is the area of using ICT to enable studentsto be producers of citizenship-relatedcultural products. This area is potentiallythe most exciting and fruitful area of ICTdevelopment for citizenship education -

fitting closely with the National Curriculumstrand ‘developing skills of enquiry andcommunication’. As Buckingham (1999,p182) persuasively argues:

"If the struggle for citizenship is partly astruggle over the means and substance ofcultural expression - and particularly overthose which are made available by theelectronic media - it is essential that theschool curriculum should enable youngpeople to become actively involved in themedia culture that surrounds them. Fromthis perspective, media education is notconfined to analysing the media - muchless to some mechanistic notion of ‘criticalviewing skills’. On the contrary, it aims

to encourage young people’s criticalparticipation as cultural producers in their own rights".

Production of cultural products such aswebsites focusing on citizenship issues isextremely time-consuming and oftenexpensive - but the processes of activedesign and production could be seen asoffering a more valuable learningexperience than the passive consumptionof the finished article. The ‘Future ofLearning’ group at the MIT MediaLaboratory are developing the notion of‘constructionism’ as a theory of learningand education, whereby people are seen tolearn with particular effectiveness whenthey are engaged in constructingpersonally meaningful artefacts. Whilethere are some criticisms of thisperspective, the MIT group are testingthese ideas through a highly innovativeproject ‘The City That We Want’. In thisproject Brazilian learners are constructingcomputer-based simulations of how theywould like to improve their communities -with the aim of developing criticalunderstandings of how their cities andcommunities function and the citizenshipissues that impinge on day-to-day living.

From the limited empirical literature inthis area a number of factors need to beconsidered. Although a number of‘content-free’ authoring packages areavailable to enable learners to create theirown websites, digital videos, animationsetc, students bring a range of ICT skillsand abilities with them - highlighting theissue of differentiation of authoringsoftware. As Sefton-Green andBuckingham (1996) found, students areoften comfortable with authoring softwarewhich incorporates easily usable, pre-prepared aspects - but these are often

20

on-linediscussion

groups can beseen as offeringcomplementaryarenas to real-

life communitiesand networkingamongst adults

and students

SECTION 4

THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

of limited educational effectiveness.Terming this ‘Lego-creativity’ (wherestudents create things from ‘factory made’building blocks), such studies highlight theneed for some pre-packaged software foryounger learners before they are at a stagewhere they can create their own originalcontent (Burn and Reed 1999, Sefton-Green and Buckingham 1996). Incitizenship terms this could suggest, forexample, a website authoring package forprimary school pupils where citizenshipmaterial has already been created andmerely requires reassembling, by thelearner(s). Younger and more ‘digitallyliterate’ learners could then progress ontocontent-free authoring packages aftergaining these earlier experiences.

The recently completed ‘VideoCulture’research project also provides aninteresting case study of the potentialoutcomes and limiting factors of usingmedia production with students (seeNiesyto & Buckingham 2001). The projecttook place in Germany, Hungary, the CzechRepublic, England and the USA and wasbased around secondary school studentsproducing and then exchanging video films- with the aim of facilitating interculturalencounters (ie exposing the groups ofstudents to the cultures and aesthetics oftheir counterparts from differentcountries). Although the VideoCultureproject concentrated more on theprocesses of production than learningoutcomes per se, some pertinentconclusions were drawn with regard to theproduction of digital resources forcitizenship purposes. First was the needfor young people to have a defined sense ofaudience when planning and producingdigital media in order for them to ‘de-centre’ and engage in higher orderthinking from their projects (Buckingham

& Harvey 2001). Students’ awareness thattheir films were to be viewed by studentsin other countries was seen by theresearchers as an important element ofthe projects’ success. However, althoughthe young people were found to be oftenhighly innovative and successful producersof the videos they were less effective inacting as audiences. The young peopleproved to be highly critical and oftendismissive consumers of each others’ work- learning more from the production oftheir own materials than receiving thework of other students (Niesyto 2001).There is a danger, therefore, that the useof ICT to produce citizenship materialsbecomes a one-way process, with manystudents trying to make their voices heardbut very few listening in a reciprocalmanner. Again there is evidently a role forthe teacher in mediating and managingthese processes.

Other research on students as digitalproducers has tended to concentrate onuse of multimedia authoring in classroomsettings. Although researchers have beenkeen to claim that allowing students to usesuch packages increases motivation,creativity and creative thinking, cognitivedevelopment and transferabledevelopment (eg Dimitriadi 2001, Nicaiseand Crane 1999, Atherton 2002), suchresearch findings are of limitedrobustness. Dimitriadi’s (2001)conclusions, for example, are based on acase study of two learners. Conversely,McFarlane’s (2000) study of 85 pupils usingthe HyperStudio package warned thatthere is still a danger of learnersdeveloping little real understanding ofcitizenship issues when authoringmultimedia software - with theresearchers observing that pupils wereable to repeat stereotyped facts and

21

the processes ofactive design andproduction couldbe seen asoffering a morevaluable learningexperience thanthe passiveconsumption ofthe finishedarticle

viewpoints but displayed little deepunderstanding of the topics involved. It isclear that better quality research is neededin the area of digital authoring - let alonedigital authoring and citizenship.

5 THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATINGCITIZENSHIP EDUCATION THROUGHTHE WHOLE SCHOOL

The final, and perhaps most innovative,strand to the application of technology tocitizenship education takes the form ofwhole school citizenship activities andpractices - fitting with the NationalCurriculum strand of ‘developing skills ofparticipation and responsible action’. Thisis based on the widely held theoreticalnotion that the school itself is a key site oflearning about citizenship – about power,authority, control and notions of fairnessand justice. Kerr’s (1999, p20) research, forexample, identifies the "general structureand aims of education, including theorganisation of schooling" as a maininfluence on the effectiveness ofcitizenship education policy and practice.Cullingford (1992) argues that childrendevelop a conceptualisation of ‘politics’through their everyday, personalexperiences of institutions such as theschool and the family/household. The logic of this is straightforward:

"[Inappropriate] too are schools in whichauthority is hierarchical and authoritarian.While the communicative school may notbe required to settle all decisions throughdeliberation, it would need to pay specialattention to articulating reasons carefullyand to ensuring that a range of differentperspectives are heard and taken intoaccount in making them. The culture of the school would be expected to

make space for the expression and serious listening to of difference". (Enslin et al 2001, p129)

"Students who learn about democracy insocial studies courses but who fail to see itpractised in the classroom or school aregiven the message that democracy is alofty ideal, but it is not for the real world.What is needed then is an approach tocitizenship education that will not onlyprepare students for democraticparticipation but help them to appreciatethe value of democratic institutions".(Power 1993, p190)

Educational research since the 1960s hasidentified the importance of a ‘democraticclassroom climate’ in fostering students’political knowledge and interest (eg Oliver& Shaver 1988, Parker 1996). As Morrisand Cogan’s six country comparative studyof citizenship education concluded:

"From the perspective of pupils, there wasoften a very clear awareness of thedisjuncture between theory school’sprecepts and its practices. It was the latterthat were seen to define the values thatthe school thought were important… These values were most powerfullymanifested not in the formal curriculumbut through the organisation of schoolactivities and the various elements thatcomprise hidden or implicit curriculum".(Morris & Cogan 2001, p119)

There are a range of formal structures andpolicies that can be adopted at a wholeschool level. As Morris & Cogan’s (2001,p112) research found: "across all societiesschools were required or encouraged touse the informal school curriculum (eg thecreation of student councils/unions) as avehicle to promote civic education".

22

children develop a

conceptualisationof ‘politics’

through theireveryday,personal

experiences ofinstitutions such

as the schooland the

family/household

SECTION 5

THE ROLE OF ICT IN FACILITATING CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION THROUGH THE WHOLE SCHOOL

Education in the Netherlands, for example,encourages a ‘study house’ concept whereolder students are encouraged to moveaway from traditional classroom teachingand organise other methods of learningand the use of school councils. In Denmarkthere is a similar requirement that schoolsshould model democracy through a rangeof class decision making activities.

There is renewed empirical interest in theUK in the area of ‘student voice’ in schools,with the ESRC currently funding aresearch network on consulting pupilsunder the Teaching and LearningProgramme. Research work on this project(and previous research carried out by thesame team) shows that student voicemechanisms such as school andclassroom councils can be effective only ifthey are truly democratic, listened to andacted upon by other members of theschool (both adults and children) and arenot treated in a tokenistic manner (seeMacBeath & Mortimore 2001, Ruddock &Flutter 2000). Moreover, this research alsoreminds us that students are not the samein respect of offering a voice, with somestudents more willing to participate andspeak than others (eg middle class girlswho feel more at ease with speaking in a school and teacher context) (Fielding 2002).

There are obvious ICT applications for thisstudent voice element of citizenshipeducation and new technologies couldhave the potential to overcome some of thecaveats mentioned above. The schoolcouncil model would appear ideally suitedto ICT, using e-democracy to helpestablish and run regular class and formcouncil meetings and the wider schoolcouncils and working committees. Interms of arranging elections, wider

consultation between representatives andother pupils, as well as inter-councilcommunication and discussion, a range ofICT-based e-democracy applications couldbe used, such as voting and evaluationtools - overcoming the traditional barriersto such activities such as finding commontimes to meet and encroaching ontraditional curriculum time.

The potential for ICT-based democracy hasbeen well rehearsed in the generalsociology and political studies literatures(eg Tsagarousianou et al 1998, Poster1997) and it has long been speculated thatcomputer-mediated communication willreduce the barriers to communicationbetween people working at differenthierarchies within organisations (Sproull &Kiesler 1996) - yet as with the otheraspects of citizenship education very little,if any, empirical research has been carriedout regarding schools, students andcitizenship. The scant writing that doesexist is of generally poor quality. Povey(1997) offers a weak argument (based onre-interpretation of findings from earlierresearch) as to how information technologycan be used in mathematics teaching toengender a sense of citizenship throughdemocratising learners’ relationships withknowledge. Although the ability of ICT to alter students’ relationships withknowledge is well documented, theconclusion of a learner-centredmathematics curriculum "enabl[ing]students to participate in a democracymore effectively" (Povey 1997, p109) isbased largely on conjecture and indicativeof the weak writing in the area. Thus thearea of ICT facilitating citizenshipeducation through the whole school can beoffered only at the moment as an area ofinterest for future activity - with noempirical basis for its effectiveness.

23

6 TECHNOLOGY AND CITIZENSHIPEDUCATION: TOWARDS AN AGENDAFOR FUTURE RESEARCH, POLICYAND PRACTICE

This literature review has been able todevelop a theoretically informed basis forthe future development of curriculumpolicy and learning resources to supportcitizenship teaching and learning. Yet onthe whole it has been unable to offer asound empirically informed basis for futureactivity. Put simply, whilst there is muchrhetoric and theoretical writing there hasbeen little, if any, high calibre and rigorousresearch carried out in the area ofcitizenship and technology. The researchstudies that have been identifiedthroughout this review have, on the whole,been small scale, often in case study form,providing exploratory and/or reflexiveaccounts. Whilst providing a usefulbackground to the issues raised, concernsover sampling, pseudo-measurement ofoutcomes and weak generalisabilityhamper the existing small body ofliterature to the extent that broadempirically informed conclusions can not(and should not) be drawn. Althoughgeneral research into ICT, teaching andlearning is often said to suffer from a lackof quality and rigour, it appears thatresearch into ICT and citizenship may be aparticularly weak subset of the field(although see discussion below).

In the absence of a coherent body ofempirical research in the area, this reviewhas attempted to identify a framework ofsalient issues upon which to direct andbase future activity in the area oftechnology and citizenship education. Inlooking at the three areas of curriculum,formal teaching and learning, and informal

school activities, key questions need to beasked by researchers relating to thedevelopments suggested above, eg:

• how can ICT best be used to facilitateactive rather than passive citizenshiplearning?

• which types of online/networkedinteractions facilitate the most effectivediscussions between communities ofcitizenship learners?

• how can ICT-based democracy best beapplied in classroom and whole schoolsettings?

• do ICT-based democracy and ‘studentvoice’ applications lead to implicitand/or explicit citizenship learning?

• in what ways does students’ productionof digital citizenship resources engendercitizenship learning ?

There is, without doubt, a pressing needfor good research to be carried out in thearea. However, this task should beapproached with caution by the researchcommunity. Important as these questionsare it must be recognised that somequestions that educationalists andpolicymakers would like to ask aboutcitizenship and technology cannot berigorously researched and satisfactorilyanswered. For example, it is difficult, andsome would argue counter-intuitive, to tryto measure the outcomes of citizenshipeducation and, it follows, the effectivenessof ICT in creating informed citizens.Indeed, the dearth of rigorous and robustempirical work in the area of citizenshipeducation is partly a result of the difficultyof adequately measuring progress in anarea with broadly defined outcomes,"involving the acquisition of knowledge andunderstanding, and the development of

24

it is difficult, and some would

argue counter-intuitive, to try to

measure theoutcomes of

citizenshipeducation and, it

follows, the‘effectiveness’ of

ICT in creatinginformed citizens

SECTION 6

TECHNOLOGY AND CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION:TOWARDS AN AGENDA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH,POLICY AND PRACTICE

values and dispositions, and skills andattitudes, it is much more difficult tomeasure how successfully these outcomeshave been achieved" (Morris & Cogan2001, p120).

For example, researchers have attemptedonly with limited success in the past toempirically measure outcomes ofcitizenship education. Some studies haveutilised the Classroom Climate Scale(Ehman 1969) which seeks to measure theextent to which citizenship-type thinkingand discussion is encouraged inclassrooms. Other researchers haveattempted to use measures of ‘politicalefficacy’, ‘political trust’ and ‘politicalinterest’ (Hahn 1999). Researchers havealso attempted to develop attitude scalestowards citizenship (John & Osborn 1992,Furnham 1985, Shaver et al 1971). Yet aswas highlighted with regard to thetelevision ‘effects’ research discussed inSection 3 of this report, these are oftencrude measures of complex phenomenaand can only be seen to be of limitedusefulness. More convincing than methodsbuilt around the quasi/false quantificationof ‘citizenship outcomes’ is the approachadopted by Schweinhart and Weikart (1997)in carrying out a 20 year longitudinal study attempting to identify the effect of educational experiences on adults’citizenship behaviour. Yet the size andtiming of such an approach render itunhelpful in terms of evaluating ICTinterventions.

Thus the key and cutting edge questions surrounding citizenship and new technologies are more likely to be theoretical and exploratory rather than empirical and definitive:

"Rather than attempting to measure the effectiveness of news incommunicating political information, we should be asking how it enablesviewers to construct and define theirrelationship with the public sphere".(Buckingham 1999, p175)

Whilst this review has been able to identifyareas of future activity for educators andtechnologists (see summary ofimplications) there is a definite need forcareful practice in this area. It should beconcluded that the area of citizenshipeducation is one which is best approachedwith caution by educational technologistswishing to make a lasting, valuable impacton educational practice. Citizenshipeducation is an area of the curriculum inEngland and Wales which is ripe for themisapplication of ICT - as a quick fix to anew area of education which someteachers and schools are ambivalent orhostile towards. In countries such as theUK and USA citizenship and civics aresubjects which have traditionally had weakboundaries. Even in light of the mandatorynature of citizenship in most countries, thedanger remains that citizenship willcontinue to be a marginalised andperipheral subject - remaining part of the‘phantom curriculum’. As Dixon (2000, p94)argues, the "requirement for schools inBritain to teach citizenship can hardly besaid to be response to lively grass rootsenthusiasm amongst teachers", withrecent studies reporting that a significantproportion of teachers perceive citizenshipeducation as a burden (Supple 1999). Evenin education systems where citizenshipand civics have long been mandatory acynicism and marginalisation oftenprevails in schools (Morris & Cogan 2001).Thus, as Dixon (2000, p96) warns, applying

25

the key and‘cutting edge’questionssurroundingcitizenship andnew technologiesare more likely tobe theoreticaland exploratoryrather thanempirical anddefinitive

ICT to citizenship education in schoolscould easily add to the marginalisationof the subject:

"ICT is already playing its part and offersexperiences (for example of internationalnetworking between schools and children)which undoubtedly enlarge their horizonsbut in their glamour it may be overlookedthat they rarely engage students inanything more than an exchange ofinformation … It is likely to end up creating the ‘virtual child world citizen’who will then consequently acquire aspurious reality".

Commercially there are alreadysuggestions of companies repackagingexisting software with a ‘new’ citizenshiptag. Although the existing software/resource base is useful it concentrates toomuch on passive citizenship education.There is a danger that in curriculum termsICT and citizenship becomes based around"the already hollow slogans coming fromgovernment and industry" (Waks 1996,p288) such as ‘information society’ and ‘e-citizenship’, with the use of e-mail andthe world wide web leading only tominimal, passive citizenship learningexperiences and outcomes. That said thisreview has been able to identify areaswhere technology can be developed as anenhancement rather than containment ofcitizenship education - in promoting active,participative learning through and forcitizenship. As such there is value inpursuing the development of ICT-basedapplications along these lines ascitizenship continues to develop as a subject in UK education.

7 SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, CURRICULUMDEVELOPMENT, DESIGN OFLEARNING RESOURCES ANDEDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Given the relative paucity of practice,research and software development in thearea of citizenship education, there isplenty of scope for future activity regardingthe use of ICT. However, it should berestated that any activity needs to becarefully approached. Given its status as a new and ill-defined area of educationwhich some teachers and schools areambivalent or hostile towards, there is adanger that: (i) some software developerswill see citizenship as an area of thecurriculum ripe for exploitation; and (ii)that policymakers and educationalists will see ICT as a convenient means ofdelivering an awkward area of thecurriculum. At best ICT can play asupporting rather than central role incitizenship education. That said there ispotential for ICT to be used to enhancecitizenship education and promote active,participative learning through and for citizenship.

7.1 IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOL PRACTICE

At present ICT can be used for a host ofactivities which lead to active learning forcitizenship. Although the use of ICT as asource of citizenship education can beinvaluable (eg via websites and CD-Roms),teachers should look to more innovativeuses of ICT in their citizenship provision.Using existing software teachers can:

26

the area ofcitizenship

education is onewhich is best

approached withcaution by

educationaltechnologists

wishing to makea lasting,

valuable impacton educational

practice

SECTION 7

SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE,CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN OF LEARNINGRESOURCES AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

i Use ICT as a means of engenderingcitizenship discussion

• use online and networkedcommunication packages (such as First Class) to promote citizenshipdiscussion and discussion both withinand between schools

• use software which simulates socialsituations with the aim of engenderingdiscussion amongst learners.

ii Use ICT to help learners producecitizenship materials

• use content-free authoring packages (egwebpage authoring packages, digitalvideo editing packages, desktoppublishing) to enable students to beproducers of citizenship culturalproducts. Production of culturalproducts such as websites, videos andanimations focusing on citizenshipissues is sometimes time-consumingand technically demanding - but theprocesses of active design andproduction often offer a more valuablecitizenship learning experience than the passive consumption of ready-made products.

iii Use ICT for whole school citizenshipactivities and practices

• schools and senior management teams should be encouraged to explorethe possibilities of promoting citizenshipthrough the use of ICT-based schoolcouncils and other class decisionmaking activities. There are obvious ICT applications to this element ofcitizenship education (ie inter-schoolvirtual communities, online votingpackages).

7.2 IMPLICATIONS FOR CURRICULUMDEVELOPMENT

A key issue yet to be addressed adequatelyby curriculum developers (at both thenational and school levels) is how ICTshould be approached as a topic ofcitizenship education. The NationalCurriculum highlights the area of newtechnology and media as a relevantelement of citizenship curricula but leavesconsiderable flexibility of definition anddevelopment of content on the part ofschools and teachers. Much thought andeffort needs to go into developinginnovative yet rational ICT elements inschools’ citizenship curricula. Whilstschools are in a position to develop this ona case-by-case basis, more guidance fromcentral government agencies would bewelcome, building on the advice currentlybeing offered by agencies such as Becta.

In particular curriculum developers shouldbe wary of over-emphasising the potentialuse of technology in society as opposed toits actual use. There is clearly a need forthe development of a sensible curriculumwhich moves beyond a functional model ofICT knowledge and aims to demystifytechnology and explore its wider societalconsequences. This can be seen as an‘ideological’ model of technology andsociety. The emphasis of an ideologicalapproach is on considering how and whyICT has been constructed and shaped,rather than attempting specific functionaldefinitions of ICT and society. From thisperspective we have offered an indicativerange of areas of citizenship andtechnology which could be developed in amaximal model of citizenship education:

27

• awareness of the social implications of ICT for individuals

• awarness of the implications of ICT at a societal level

• awareness of the social shaping oftechnology by social, cultural, politicaland economic influences

• addressing questions of equity in accessto, and use of, ICT

• awareness of issues of power andcontrol associated with newtechnologies in society

• awareness of the historical precedentsas well as the future potentials of ‘new’technologies.

7.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN OF LEARNING RESOURCES

There are few specifically designedcitizenship software packages. Using thethree categories of practice outlined abovethere are opportunities for softwaredevelopers to concentrate their activitieson the following areas of citizenshipeducation:

i Using ICT as a means of engenderingcitizenship discussion

• if schools are to use online andnetworked communication packages topromote citizenship discussion anddiscussion both within and betweenschools there is a need to develop someschool-specific versions of CMCsoftware such as ‘First Class’

• developing more content specific ‘socialsimulations’ with the aim of stimulatingdiscussion amongst learners. Manyschools use commercial packages suchas SimCity and the other Sims range

of software. Software which requireslearners to discuss social situations andconsider a range of decisions looks setto be attractive to citizenship teachersand learners.

ii Using ICT to help learners producecitizenship materials

• there is a need to develop content-specific authoring packages (egwebpage authoring packages, digitalvideo editing packages, desktoppublishing) to enable younger studentsto be producers of citizenship culturalproducts. This would be authoringsoftware designed for younger children(Key Stages 1 and 2) with a range ofpre-packaged citizenship content which could be selected and added by the child - thus creating digitalcitizenship materials without the need to develop their own contentcompletely from scratch.

iii Using ICT for whole school citizenshipactivities and practices

• if schools are to promote citizenshipthrough the use of ICT-based ‘studentvoice’ activities there is an obvious needfor tailor-made packages to facilitatethis. Online school council and schoolelection software (designed for schoolintranets for example) would be twoexamples. Software allowing schools tocreate and sustain school ‘virtualcommunities’ would also be a pertinentarea of development. Although betterresourced and staffed schools may beable to develop and adapt their ownsystems to achieve these aims in-house,many schools will not do so unlessready-made and reliable packages are available.

28

curriculumdevelopers

should be waryof over-

emphasising thepotential use of

technology insociety as

opposed to itsactual use

SECTION 7

SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE,CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN OF LEARNINGRESOURCES AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

7.4 IMPLICATIONS FOREDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

There has been little, if any, high calibreresearch carried out in the area ofcitizenship and technology. The researchstudies that do exist are, on the whole,small scale, often in case study form,providing exploratory and reflexiveaccounts. Whilst providing a usefulbackground to the issues raised, issues ofsampling, measurement of outcomes andweak generalisability hamper the existingsmall body of literature to the extent thatbroad empirically informed conclusionscan not (and should not) be drawn.Although general research into ICT,teaching and learning often suffers from a lack of quality, it appears that researchinto ICT and citizenship is a particularlyweak subset of the field. There is apressing need for well-thought out andrigorous research to be carried out -addressing a range of questions:

• how can ICT best be used to facilitateactive rather than passive citizenshiplearning?

• which types of online/networkedinteractions facilitate the most effectivediscussions between communities ofcitizenship learners?

• how can ICT-based democracy best beapplied in classroom and whole schoolsettings?

• do ICT-based democracy and ‘studentvoice’ applications lead to implicitand/or explicit citizenship learning?

• in what ways does students’ productionof digital citizenship resources engendercitizenship learning?

However, it must be recognised bycommissioners and consumers of thisresearch that some questions thateducationalists and policymakers wouldlike to ask about citizenship andtechnology cannot be rigorouslyresearched and satisfactorily answered.For example, it is difficult to try to measuremany of the outcomes of citizenshipeducation and, it follows, the effectivenessof ICT in creating informed citizens. Thedearth of robust research in the area ofcitizenship education is partly a result ofthe difficulty of adequately measuringprogress in an area with broadly definedoutcomes. The key and cutting edgequestions surrounding citizenship and new technologies are more likely to betheoretical and exploratory rather thanempirical and definitive.

29

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andreyenkov, V, Robinson, J and Popov, N (1989). News Media Use andAdolescents’ Attitudes about NuclearIssues: an American-Soviet ComparisonJournal of Communication, 39: 95-104

Arthur, J and Davidson, J (2000). Social literacy and citizenship in the schoolcurriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 11, 1:9-23

Atherton, T (2002). Developing ideas withmultimedia in the primary classroom inLoveless, A. and Dore, B. (Eds) ‘ICT in theprimary school. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press

Beck, J (1996). Citizenship education:problems and possibilities CurriculumStudies, 4, 3: 349-366

Bentley, T (1998). Learning Beyond theClassroom: Education for a changingworld. London: DEMOS/Routledge

Blyth, A Industry education: case studiesfrom the north west in Jamieson, I. (Ed) Wemake kettles: studying industry in theprimary school. London: Longman

Bromley, H and Shutkin, D (1999).Refusing to Choose: Dilemmas ofdissenting technology educators paperpresented to American EducationalResearch Association annual meeting April 1999, Montreal

Buckingham, D (1997a). The making ofcitizens: pedagogy and address inchildren's television news. Journal ofEducational Media. 23, 2-3: 119-139

Buckingham, D (1997b). Schooling Goes toMarket: Some Lessons from the ChannelOne Controversy' International Journal ofMedia and Communication Studies vol. 1[http://www.aber.ac.uk/~jmcwww/1997/channel1.html]

Buckingham, D (1999). Young people,politics and news media: beyond politicalsocialisation. Oxford Review of Education.25 1-2: 171-184.

Buckingham, D (2000). The Making of Citizens. London: Routledge

Buckingham, D and Harvey, I (2001).Imagining the audience: language,creativity and communication in youthmedia production. Journal of EducationalMedia, 26, 3:173-184

Burn, A and Reed, K (1999). Digiteens:media literacies and digital technologies in the secondary classroom’ English inEducation, 33, 3 [http://www.nyu.edu/education/teachlearn/ifte/burn1.htm]

Cebrian de la Serna, M (1995). Television:a one-way bridge between cultures?Educational Media International, 32, 2: 69-74

Center for Civic Education (1994). NationalStandards for Civics and Government.Calabasas CA: Center for Civic Education

Chaffee, S and Yang, S (1990)Communication and Political Socialisationin Ichilosv, O. (Ed.) Political Socialisation,Citizenship Education and Democracy. New York: Teachers College Press

Cogan, J and Morris, P (2001). A comparative overview: civic educationacross six societies. International Journalof Educational Research 35, 1: 109-123

Crick Advisory Group (1998). Education forcitizenship and the teaching of democracyin schools. London: QCA

Crick, B (1999). The presuppositions of citizenship education. Journal ofPhilosophy of Education, 33, 3: 337-352

30

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Crick, B (2000). The English citizenshiporder: a temperate reply to critics. SchoolField. 11, nos. 3-4: 61-72

Cullingford, C (1992). Children andSociety: Children’s Attitudes to Politics andPower. London: Cassell

De Jong, T, van Joolingen, W, Swaak, J, Veermans, K, Limbach, R, King, S andGureghian, D (1998). Self-DirectedLearning in Simulation Based DiscoveryEnvironments. Journal of ComputerAssisted Learning, 14: 235-246

Devon, R (1987). In Praise of ComputerIlliteracy. in Bulletin of Science, Technologyand Society. 7: 338-343.

DfES Citizenship Website (2002).[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/citizenship/index.cfm]

Dimitriadi, Y (2001). Evaluating the use of multimedia authoring with dyslexiclearners: a case study. British Journal ofEducational Technology, 32, 3: 265-276

Dixon, A (2000). Fire blankets or depthcharges: choices in education forcitizenship. Forum (For Promoting 3-19Comprehensive Education) 42, 3: 94-99

Eggleston, J (1999). Learning to be acitizen in the global age. MulticulturalTeaching. 18, 1: 8-11.

Ehman, L (1969). An analysis of therelationships of selected educationalvariables with the political socialization of high school students. AmericanEducational Research Journal 6, 4:559-580.

Enslin, P, Pendlebury, S and Tjiattas, M(2001). Deliberative democracy, diversityand the challenges of citizenshipeducation. Journal of Philosophy ofEducation. 35, 1: 115-130

Facer, K, Furlong, R, Furlong, J andSutherland, R (2001). Constructing thechild computer user: from public policy to private practices. British Journal ofSociology of Education, 22, 1: 91-108

Fullinwider, R (1987). Technologicalliteracy and citizenship. Bulletin ofScience, Technology and Society, 7, 1/2:320-324

Fielding, M (2002). Beyond the rhetoric of student voice: new departures or newconstraints in the transformation of 21stcentury schooling. Forum, 43, 2: 100-109

Fogelman, K (1992). Citizenship and thenational curriculum. Curriculum. 13, 3:158-162

Foster, D (1996). Community and Identityin the Electronic Village in Porter, D. (Ed)Internet Culture. London: Routledge

Furnham, B (1985). Adolescent’s Socio-Political Attitudes in Different Nations.Political Psychology, 6: 621-636

Gates, W (with Myhrvold, N. andRinearson, P.) (1995).The Road Ahead.London: Penguin

Government of Australia (1994). Whereasthe people… Civic and CitizenshipEducation. Canberra: Government ofAustralia

Graber, D (1988). Processing the News:How people tame the information tide.(Second Edition) New York: Longman

Groundwater-Smith, S and Crawford, K(1992). Computer Literacy and Matters ofEquity. Journal of Information Technologyfor Teacher Education. 1, 2, pp. 215-229.

Gunter, B (1987). Poor Reception:Misunderstanding and ForgettingBroadcast News. Hillsdale NJ, Erlbaum

31

Hahn, C (1999). Citizenship education: anempirical study of policy, practices andoutcomes. Oxford Review of Education. 25, 1-2: 231-250.

Hällgren, C and Weiner, G (2002). WhyHere? Why Now? The Web, Anti-racism,Education and the state in Sweden paperpresented to the European EducationalResearch Association (EERA) annualconference, Lisbon, Portugal, September

Hamilton, D, Dahlgren, E, Hult, A andS_derstr_m, T (2002). From messageposting to dialogue? A study of onlinepractices in adult education paperpresented to the European EducationalResearch Association (EERA) annualconference, Lisbon, Portugal, September

Henson, J (1987). Education, democracyand citizen responsibility in the informationage. ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies

Hicks, D (2001). Re-examining the future:the challenge for citizenship education.Educational Review 53, 3: 229-240

Jenkins, E (1999). School science,citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education 21, 7: 703-710

John, P. and Osborn, A (1992). Theinfluence of school ethos on pupils'citizenship attitudes. Educational Review.44, 2: 153-165

Jones, SG (1995). CyberSociety: ComputerMediated Communication and Community.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Kahle, R and Eschenauer, B (1995).Learning in a networked reality: newtechnologies and media, and conveyingthem as an educational opportunity inpolitical and cultural education work.Educational Media International 32, 3:131-134.

Kerr, D (1999). Citizenship education in thecurriculum: an international review. SchoolField. 10, nos. 3-4: 5-31.

Kerr, D (2000. Citizenship in the NationalCurriculum (England): issues andchallenges. School Field. 11, nos. 3-4:73-89

Lavoie, D and Good, R (1988). The natureand use of predictions skills in a biologicalcomputer simulation. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, 25: 335-360

Lawson, H (2001). Active citizenship inschools and the community. CurriculumJournal 12, 2: 163-178

Liebes, T (1992). Television, Parents andthe Political Socialisation of Children.Teacher College Record, 94, 1: 73-86

Livingstone, S (with Moira Bovill) (1999).Young People, New Media. London: London School of Economics

Loader, BH (1998). Cyberspace Divide:Equality, Agency and Policy in theInformation Society. London: Routledge

MacBeath, J & Mortimore, P (2001).Improving school effectiveness.Buckingham: Open University Press

Mackay, H (1992). From Computer Literacyto Technology Literacy. in Beynon, J &Mackay, H (Eds.) Technological Literacyand the Curriculum. London: Falmer.

Mackay, H and Powell, T (1998).Connecting Wales: the Internet andNational Identity in Loader, B.D. (Ed.)Cyberspace Divide: Equality, Agency andPolicy in the Information Society. London:Routledge

Marshall, TH (1950). Citizenship and SocialClass and Other Essays. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press

32

BIBLIOGRAPHY

McFarlene, A, Williams, J. and Bonnett, M (2000). Assessment andmultimedia authoring - a tool forexternalising understanding. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16:201-212

McLaughlin, T (1992). Citizenship, diversityand education: a philosophical perspective.Journal of Moral Education, 21,3: 235-246.

Mercer, N (1994). The quality of talk inchildren’s joint activity at the computer.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,10, 1: 24-32

Miller, T (2001). Cultural Citizenship.Television and New Media, 2, 3: 183-186

Morris, P and Cogan, J (2001). Acomparative overview: civic educationacross six societies. International Journalof Educational Research, 35: 109-123

Mosco, V (1997). Citizenship and thetechnopoles. Javnost, Vol.IV, No.4: 35-45

New, W. and Greene, K (2001). En-gendering Democracy: a study of onlineacademic discourse. Pedagogy, Cultureand Society, 9, 2: 187-220

Nicaise, M and Crane, M (1999).Knowledge Constructing TroughHyperMedia Authoring. EducationalTechnology Research and Development,47, 1: 29-50.

Niesyto, H. (2001). VideoCulture:conclusions and key findings. Journal ofEducational Media, 26, 3: 217-225

Niesyto, H and Buckingham, D (2001).VideoCulture: an introduction. Journal of Educational Media, 26, 3: 167-172

Ogden, J (1994). Politics in a ParallelUniverse: is there a future forcyberdemocracy? Futures, 26: 713-729

Oliver, D. and Shaver, J (1966). TeachingPublic issues in the High School

Parker, W (1996). Educating theDemocratic Mind. University of New York Press

Poster, M (1997). Cyberdemocracy:Internet and the Public Sphere in Porter, D (Ed) Internet culture. London: Routledge

Povey, H (1997). Entitlement through IT inmathematics classrooms. Journal forComputer Assisted Learning, 13, 2

Power, C (1987). Science and technologytowards informed citizenship. CastmeJournal. 7, 3: 5-18

Power, FC (1993 ). An apprenticeship indemocracy: the just community approachto civic education. Journal of CurriculumStudies: 188-195

Rassool, N (1999). Flexible identities:exploring race and gender issues among agroup of immigrant pupils in an inner-citycomprehensive school. British Journal ofSociology of Education, 20, 1: 23-36

Rheingold, H (1993). The VirtualCommunity: Homesteading on theElectronic Frontier. Reading: AddisonWesley

Riel, M (1990). Co-operative learningacross classrooms in electronic learningcircles. Instructional Science, 19: 445-466

Riel, M and Levin, J (1990). Buildingelectronic communities: successes andfailures in computer networking.Instructional Science, 19: 145-169

Roberts, L, Smith, L and Pollock, C (1997).u r a lot bolder on the Net: the Social Useof Text-Based Virtual Environments by ShyIndividuals paper presented toInternational Conference on Shyness &Self-Consciousness, Cardiff, July 1997

33

Robinson, J and Levy, M (1986). The MainSource: Learning from Television News.Beverly Hills: Sage

Robinson, J, Chivian, E. and Tudge, J(1989). News Media Use and AdolescentsAttitudes about Nuclear Issues: anAmerican-Soviet Comparison. Journal of Communication, 39: 105-113

Royal Society (1985). The publicunderstanding of science. London: Royal Society

Ruddock, J. & Flutter, J (2000). Pupilparticipation and pupil perspectives:carving a new order of experience.Cambridge Journal of Education, 30:75-89

Savicki, V, Kelley, M and Lingenfelter, D(1996). Gender and Small Task GroupActivity using Computer MediatedCommunication. Computers in HumanBehaviour, 12: 209-224

Schoch, NA and White, MD (1997). A Study of the Communication Patterns of Participants in Consumer HealthElectronic Discussion Groups. Proceedingsof the 60th Annual Meeting of theAmerican Society for Information Science,34: 280-292

Schute, V and Glaser, R (1990). A largescale investigation of an intelligentdiscovery world. Interactive LearningEnvironments, 1: 51-77

Schweinhart, L and Weikart, D (1997). ASummary of Significant Benefits: the HighScope Perry Pre-School Study ThroughAge 27. Ypsilanti: High/Scope Press

Sefton-Green, J and Buckingham, D(1996). Digital Visions: Children's CreativeUses of Multimedia Technologies.Convergence 2, 2: 47-79

Sellinger, M (1998). Forming a CriticalCommunity Through Telematics.Computers and Education, 30, 1/2: 23-30,

Selwyn, N (2000). Creating a ConnectedCommunity? Teachers Use of an ElectronicDiscussion Group. Teachers CollegeRecord, 101, 4: 750-778

Selwyn, N, Marriott, N and Marriott, P(2000). Net Gains or Net Pains? BusinessStudents. Use of the Internet in University.Higher Education Quarterly, 54, 2: 166-186

Shaver, J, Hofner, H and Richards, H(1971). The authoritarianism of Americanand German teacher education students.Journal of Social Psychology, 84: 303-304

Simmons, P and Lunetta, V (1993).Problem Solving Behaviours During aGenetics computer simulation. Journal ofResearch in Science Teaching,30: 153-173

Smith, MA and Kollock, P. (1999).Communities in Cyberspace. London:Routledge

Sproull, L & Kiesler, S (1996). IncreasingPersonal Connections in Kling, R. (Ed)Computerisation and Controversy: ValueConflicts and Social Choices. New York:Academic Press

Steele J (1987). Educating For Citizenship -What Students Need To Know AboutTechnology. Bulletin Of Science Technology& Society 7, 5-6: 738-740

Street, B (1987). Models of ComputerLiteracy. in Finnegan, R Salaman, G &Thompson, K (Eds.) InformationTechnology: Social Issues. Milton Keynes:OU Press.

Supple, C (1999). Ideals for citizenshipeducation. Multicultural Teaching 18, 1:16-19

34

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Tabak, I, Smith, B, Sandoval, W andReiser, B (1996). Combining General anddomain specific strategic support forbiological inquiry in Frasson, C., Gauthier,G. and Lesgold, A. (Eds) IntelligentTutoring Systems. Berlin, Springer-Verlag

Tsagarousianou, R, Tambini, D and Bryan, C (eds) (1998).Cyberdemocracy: Technology, Cities andCivic Networks. London: Routledge

Turnbull, J and Muir, E (2001). Thepractice of citizenship: embracing diversityin learning and teaching with implicationsfor in-service training and professionaldevelopment. Journal of In-ServiceEducation 27, 3: 429-446

Veenman, M and Elshout, J (1995).Differential Effects of Instructional Supporton Learning in Simulation Environments.Instructional Science, 22: 363-383

Waks, L (1996). Citizenship in transition:globalisation, postindustrial technologyand education. International Journal ofTechnology & Design Education 6, 3: 287-300

Wegerif, R and Scrimshaw, P (1997).Computers and Talk in the PrimaryClassroom. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Wegerif, R, Mercer, N and Dawes, L(1998).Software Design to SupportDiscussion in the Primary Classroom.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,14: 199-211

Wellman, B. and Gulia, M (1999). VirtualCommunity as Communities: Net SurfersDon’t Ride Alone in Smith, M.A. andKollock, P. (Eds) Communities inCyberspace. London: Routledge

Wexler, P (1990). Citizenship in thesemiotic society in Turner, B. (Ed) Theories of modernity and postmodernity.London: Sage

White C (1987). Citizenship AndInformation Technology - A Rational ForCurriculum Reform. Proceedings Of TheASIS Annual Meeting 24: 261-261

35

APPENDIX

INDICATIVE CITIZENSHIP SOFTWAREAND ONLINE RESOURCES

Best-selling UK Citizenship Software(March-September 2002) Source R-E-M /Educ@Guardian supplement

TitleBilly and the Big D-cision

Billy Breaks the Rules

Interactive Lets Stop Bullying

Senior Interactive Conduct File

Lessonbank PSHE 1-6

Cyberace

Language in Evidence

President for a Day

USEFUL CITIZENSHIP WEBRESOURCES

Citizenship Foundation

Institute for Citizenship

Windows on the world

CSV Community partners

Timeforcitizenship

Association for Citizenship Teachers

Schools Council UK

Citizen 21 (Charter 88)

Your Turn

The Fawcett Society

ESRC Consulting Pupils About Teachingand Learning Project

YouthNet UK

36

APPENDIX

Age10-14

8-14

11-16

11-13

7-11

11-14

8-16

15+

PublisherInformation Plus

Information Plus

Birchfield Interactive

JDJA Education

Belair

Rural Media Company

Cambridgeshire Software House

Damaris

www.citfou.org.uk

www.citizen.org.uk

www.wotw.org.uk

www.csvcommunitypartners.org.uk

www.timeforcitizenship.com

www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk

www.schoolscouncil.org

www.citizen21.org.uk

www.yourturn.net

www.equalcitizen.org.uk

www.consultingpupils.co.uk

www.thesite.org.uk

About Futurelab

Futurelab is passionate about transforming the way people learn. Tapping into the hugepotential offered by digital and other technologies, we are developing innovative learningresources and practices that support new approaches to education for the 21st century.

Working in partnership with industry, policy and practice, Futurelab:

• incubates new ideas, taking them from the lab to the classroom• offers hard evidence and practical advice to support the design and use of innovative

learning tools• communicates the latest thinking and practice in educational ICT• provides the space for experimentation and the exchange of ideas between the

creative, technology and education sectors.

A not-for-profit organisation, Futurelab is committed to sharing the lessons learnt fromour research and development in order to inform positive change to educational policyand practice.

Futurelab1 Canons RoadHarboursideBristol BS1 5UHUnited Kingdom

tel +44 (0)117 915 8200fax +44 (0)117 915 8201info@futurelab.org.uk

www.futurelab.org.uk

Registered charity 1113051

Creative Commons

© Futurelab 2006. All rights reserved; Futurelab has an open access policy which encourages circulation ofour work, including this report, under certain copyright conditions - however, please ensure that Futurelab isacknowledged. For full details of our Creative Commons licence, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm

Disclaimer

These reviews have been published to present useful and timely information and to stimulate thinking anddebate. It should be recognised that the opinions expressed in this document are personal to the author andshould not be taken to reflect the views of Futurelab. Futurelab does not guarantee the accuracy of theinformation or opinion contained within the review.

This publication is available to download from the Futurelab website –www.futurelab.org.uk/research/lit_reviews.htm

Also from Futurelab:

Literature Reviews and Research ReportsWritten by leading academics, these publications provide comprehensive surveys ofresearch and practice in a range of different fields.

HandbooksDrawing on Futurelab's in-house R&D programme as well as projects from around theworld, these handbooks offer practical advice and guidance to support the design anddevelopment of new approaches to education.

Opening Education SeriesFocusing on emergent ideas in education and technology, this series of publicationsopens up new areas for debate and discussion.

We encourage the use and circulation of the text content of these publications, whichare available to download from the Futurelab website – www.futurelab.org.uk/research.For full details of our open access policy, go to www.futurelab.org.uk/open_access.htm.

FUTURELAB SERIES

REPORT 3

ISBN: 0-9544695-3-4Futurelab © 2002